Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
But suppose I and nobody else discovered a piece of land with gold more than 50 times the supply already known to exist on earth.
So now I would have about 98% of all the world's gold and all new gold. I wouldn't get rewarded for that gold, correct?
If I gave it to everybody the price of gold would plummet because the number of sellers would quickly outpace the number of buyers and the sellers would have to drop their prices...
If I kept all this gold it would be no different....my first gold mine would sell high but my last gold mine would no sell for nearly as much or perhaps close to 0
So how would I be rewarded for finding this rare gold if this were a true story?
And with this said, one solution might be to mask how much gold I have and actually sell it very slowly, over a long duration in small amounts, correct?
But if this is the solution, then how does this socially benefit others when the supply is readily available and financially I am better off hoarding it than rapidly selling it?
Wasn't the 1970s hoax oil shortage related to the exercise of this trick used by big oil to maximize oil profit? A result being instead of that society being more productive due to invisible hand, the people were wasting hours of time in gas lines fooled to believe gasoline was in shortage
Isn't this a fundamental flaw in capitalism? Or not ?
And there have been historic flawed dilemmas. Namely the industrial revolution. A worker in a printing press discovers a machine that is more durable and now the machine hours replace labor hours. The worker knew how to reinvent printing due to his own hard work but once the guy's idea for the new machine catches on,
His original invention becomes not the one that takes off in the market
Instead, his machine doesn't sell Eventhough it made the footprint for the person whose machine did replace the manual labor. So this guy winds up shooting himself in the foot...losing his job
And ultimately the machines get cheaper as they themselves can be produced more and more efficiently due to technological advances
And with this said, one solution might be to mask how much gold I have and actually sell it very slowly, over a long duration in small amounts, correct?
But if this is the solution, then how does this socially benefit others when the supply is readily available and financially I am better off hoarding it than rapidly selling it?
Wasn't the 1970s hoax oil shortage related to the exercise of this trick used by big oil to maximize oil profit? A result being instead of that society being more productive due to invisible hand, the people were wasting hours of time in gas lines fooled to believe gasoline was in shortage
Isn't this a fundamental flaw in capitalism? Or not ?
Capitalism doesn't consider social benefits as its sole goal. Social benefits may derive from capitalist practice as a byproduct. If you want a system that's about social benefits, you should look at socialism, which failed in many countries.
Capitalism isn't a perfect system nor does it even claim that. Its flaws are plenty and have been thoroughly analyzed. Such an understanding was originally the foundation of communism and communist revolutions. And that was 100 years. There is nothing new about the criticism of capitalism.
And there have been historic flawed dilemmas. Namely the industrial revolution. A worker in a printing press discovers a machine that is more durable and now the machine hours replace labor hours. The worker knew how to reinvent printing due to his own hard work but once the guy's idea for the new machine catches on,
His original invention becomes not the one that takes off in the market
Instead, his machine doesn't sell Eventhough it made the footprint for the person whose machine did replace the manual labor. So this guy winds up shooting himself in the foot...losing his job
And ultimately the machines get cheaper as they themselves can be produced more and more efficiently due to technological advances
Instead he reduces his earning capacity
What you presented were cases where the people didn't know how to capitalize on a skill, a discovery, or an invention.
Companies hold off features and make more product versions so that they sell more. Researchers split one paper into two papers so that they get more publications. It's about how you strategically gain a position in a favor of your interests. If you discovered the gold mine, you should reward your own efforts. You may well hold off and sell little by little.
But suppose I and nobody else discovered a piece of land with gold more than 50 times the supply already known to exist on earth.
So now I would have about 98% of all the world's gold and all new gold. I wouldn't get rewarded for that gold, correct?
If I gave it to everybody the price of gold would plummet because the number of sellers would quickly outpace the number of buyers and the sellers would have to drop their prices...
If I kept all this gold it would be no different....my first gold mine would sell high but my last gold mine would no sell for nearly as much or perhaps close to 0
So how would I be rewarded for finding this rare gold if this were a true story?
Any economic system will have issues if you push it to extremes using thought experiments. This shouldn't come as a surprise.
Location: East of Seattle since 1992, 615' Elevation, Zone 8b - originally from SF Bay Area
44,585 posts, read 81,260,275 times
Reputation: 57826
Hoarding to keep prices up, despite the lack of benefit to society is already being used not only by oil companies, but in the diamond market. Part of capitalism is supply and demand, and managing that is key to financial success for those selling. When it comes to gold, government regulation would probably end up with your supply being confiscated, as has happened in the past.
What you describe fails, but what you describe is nothing to do with capitalism - it is merely an unrealistic set of hypothetical conditions which you have invented specifically to fail.
But suppose I and nobody else discovered a piece of land with gold more than 50 times the supply already known to exist on earth.
So now I would have about 98% of all the world's gold and all new gold. I wouldn't get rewarded for that gold, correct?
If I gave it to everybody the price of gold would plummet because the number of sellers would quickly outpace the number of buyers and the sellers would have to drop their prices...
If I kept all this gold it would be no different....my first gold mine would sell high but my last gold mine would no sell for nearly as much or perhaps close to 0
So how would I be rewarded for finding this rare gold if this were a true story?
Short gold. Think about going long on copper.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
